Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Guangyang Secondary School


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was Keep but cleanup.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)   16:47, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

Guangyang Secondary School
Very badly written artcle, using stuff taken from the school website but changed enoguh to avoid copyright problems. The result is a very NPOV and bad article about a school that is fairly non-notable. I tried to work out a rewrite but just can't find any decent reliable sources for most of the stuff --Errant Tmorton166(Talk)(Review me) 20:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. This site appears to be a good source. --Ginkgo100 talk · contribs · e@ 20:45, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. WP:NPOV is not a reason to delete.  It's a reason to change the article.  "Bad article" which probably means poor copyediting in this case is not a reason to delete, it's a reason to cleanup (which I've placed the tag on).  This leaves notability and verifiability, and despite what people think about schools it seems that schools are notable even in places you haven't visited before.  The preceding link is a government website and therefore satisfies reliable sources.  ColourBurst 22:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. There will be an article about it in the long run, so let's work from this as a base. Piccadilly 23:15, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup, per above. --Elonka 23:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per WP:NN No notability asserted, and I would challenge the notability of the school. Modern secondary school a result of a number of mergers. No mention of notable alumni. Ohconfucius 03:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and cleanup. There is no consensus standard for notability of schools, but this meets my personal criteria. &mdash; RJH (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.